Restoration Plan: Arverne Shorebird Preserve and Rockaway Beach

Katie May Laumann

 
Established in 1996, the Arverne Shorebird Preserve is a protected area used by piping plovers (Charadrius melodus) during breeding season.  The piping plover is a migratory shorebird on the federal endangered species list.  Other species occupying this site include least terns (Sterna antillarum), a state-listed endangered species, and oystercatchers (Haematopus ostralegus).  Sea beach amaranth (Amaranthus pumilis), an endangered plant, also occurs in and around the preserve.  The preserve consists of thirteen blocks of beach “cordoned off” during breeding season to protect plovers from human disturbance (NYC Department of Parks and Recreation).  With the dangerously low number of existing amaranth populations and the many threats to piping plover survival, it has become imperative that more than just the human threats to these species be addressed.  The purpose of this restoration endeavor is to expand the preserve and to restore critical “habitat components for [a] species of interest,” to increase the chance of species survival. (Falk et al. 2006 in Foundations of Restoration Ecology.)  The species of interest are plovers, least terns, amaranth, and their associates.

 

Population genetics are important to consider for this restoration project, especially because several of the species involved are endangered and currently have small populations.  Genetic diversity is the “basis for adaptation of orgs to changing environments” and “is linked strongly to life history traits, particularly dispersal and reprod mode.”  Genetic diversity tends to be low in small populations and in species like Seabeach Amaranth that self fertilize and disperse widely; this is because there is “less gene flow among populations of species that self fertilize.”  In some ways, this might make reintroduction of a species simpler; the worry that individuals from a certain area will not be well adapted to the introduction area is reduced if all populations are genetically similar.  (Falk et al. 2006).

 

According to Noss and Cooperrider, a metapopulation is “a set of partially isolated populations belonging to the same species” that can “exchange individuals and recolonize sites in which the species has recently become extinct” (1994).  Because plovers disperse to various beaches during breeding season and amaranth disperses widely and is extirpated frequently based on habitat suitability, metapopulation theory applies to this project.  According to theory, a minimum viable metapopulation (mvm) size consists of a “minimum number of interacting local populations necessary for long-term persistence of a metapopulation.”  This minimum number, typically between 15 and 20 well connected patches, will cause “balance between local extinctions and recolonization,” allowing the metapopulation to persist.  Unfortunately, “many rare and endangered species…fall below mvm size.”  Restoration efforts can “tip the scales toward greater metapopulation persistence by repeatedly collecting and introducing new individuals and by modifying the habitat to increase likelihood of survival.”  This restoration project will focus on modifying habitat.  (Maschinski 2006 in Foundations of Restoration Ecology).

 

Habitat modification will be the first step in restoration of the ecosystem and community structure relied upon by and affected by the focal species of this project.  “Community structure includes species composition and diversity” as well as species abundance.  Communities are composed of core and satellite species.  Core species are the most abundant while satellite species are “less freq and less abundant” (Menninger and Palmer).  The main species considered in this project could be considered satellite species, as they are “less likely to colonize and more likely to go extinct in patches.”  This could make restoration and recovery of these species difficult.  In addition to community structure and processes of this community, “ocean-shore interactions” must be considered.  This is because in this community spatial boundaries “have been blurred” and “prey, energy, or detritus” from the ocean habitat “subsidizes the community of” the terrestrial shore habitat; shorebirds that utilize the beach consume fish and small shellfish (Menninger and Palmer 2006 in Foundations of Restoration Ecology).  Conditions in one habitat could affect conditions in the other.  Ideally the processes and functioning of this ecosystem will be restored as the community is restored (Naeem 2006 in Foundations of Restoration Ecology).

 

In restoring habitat for critical species, ecophysiological constraints must be taken into account.  If constraints are not considered risk of failure of the species in question and of the restoration is high.  All organisms have ecophysiological constraints; in plants these constraints manifest in “capacities to tolerate biotic and abiotic stressors.”  “Two basic ecophysiological themes that relate to capacity [of plants] to become reestablished” are light and energy levels and water and nutrient levels.  Water availability becomes a problem for amaranth when other plants colonize an area; amaranth is a poor competitor, and loses when there is “competition for water by neighboring plants.”  While “water limitation…is… prevalent as a stress” for amaranth, other stressors common to plants- like disturbance and salt- are not a problem  (Ehleringer and Sandquist 2006 in Foundations of Restoration Ecology).  Just as plants have ecophysiological constraint, the shorebirds being managed for have environmental constraints.  Constraints on shorebirds include availability of suitable nesting habitat, suitable foraging habitat, and prey density.  For example, for nesting piping plovers require a minimum width beach with a low slope.  They also require wrack for foraging.  If their environmental requirements are not met a shorebird species will either not colonize and persist in an area or will colonize unsuccessfully. 

 

As mentioned, presence of other plants makes survival for amaranth difficult.  These other plants could be considered ‘invasive’ in that they “interfere with maintenance of particular vegetation types by outcompeteing more desired species [and] threatening the persistence of rare species.”  Ideally, after a disturbance this community would be resilient and “return to predisturbance conditions … within a reasonable time frame following a disturbance without large scale human intervention” (D’Antonio and Chambers 2006 in Foundations of Restortaion Ecology).  This resilience would enable the community to withstand invasion or succession of other plants.  Unfortunately, the most desired plant species in this community, sea beach amaranth, is intolerant of competition and so colonization of other plant, invasive or native, is often accompanied by extirpation of amaranth.  This may be one of the biggest challenges this restoration project will encounter.  Invasive or introduced species problems are not isolated to plants.  Specifically in this project, the large population of predators on plovers and other shorebirds must be contended with.

 

Rockaway Peninsula, including Rockaway Beach and the Arverne Shorebird Preserve was once used only by people of the Canarsie tribe and was mostly barren.  In 1685 the land was sold to Englishman Captain Palmer.  It changed hands several times and at various points contained beachfront resort towns, a railway, and amusement parks (The Wave).  In 1897 the area was incorporated into New York City, and in 1996 the part of Rockaway Peninsulas Rockaway Beach was set aside to become The Arverne Shorebird Preserve.  In 1997 New York City Urban Park Rangers began working at the site full time (Arverne Shorebird Preserve, NYC Dept of Parks and Rec).  Noise from the nearby subway stop can be heard from the preserve, as can noise and traffic from the residential area on the beach and air traffic from JFK International Airport.  Due to human disturbance, this once natural area has become degraded and now requires restoration.  During the duration of restoration the theories listed above will be used to ensure a successful, sustainable natural community emerges.

Sea Beach Amaranth (Amaranthus pumilis) once ranged from Massachusetts to South Carolina.  This low, sprawling, annual beach plant colonizes seashore habitats between “the high tide line and the toe of the primary dune” (New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection).  It has been extirpated from two thirds of its historic range and is a federally endangered species.  In 1990, a census revealed that only 55  populations of sea beach amaranth remained.  34 populations exist in North Carolina, 8 in South Carolina, and just 13 in New York.  Since then, additional populations have been discovered in New Jersey.  Despite the seemingly large number of amaranth populations, the species does not necessarily fall within the 15-20 populations required for minimum viable metapopulation (Maschinski, 2006); not all populations are well connected, and with just 13 local populations, the New York sea beach amaranth metapopulation is below mvm. 

Sea beach amaranth is “self-fertile, often showing extensive selfing” (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1996).  Seeds are dispersed by water and wind, and long-distance dispersal “takes place primarily during storm events such as fall hurricanes and winter northeasters.”  It has been suggested that amaranth, which is often “wholly…buried by winter sand movement” might retain some non-dispersed seeds that become buried with the parent plant and recolonize the area during favorable conditions.  Seeds are thought to survive in their dormant state for long periods of time and only germinate and grow when conditions are favorable.  These reproductive and dispersal strategies often result in many genetically similar local populations within each amaranth metapopulation, and may even result in similar genetic structure among all amaranth metapopulations (Falk et al. 2006). 

Sea Beach Amaranth is intolerant of erosion, but ironically responds negatively to beach replenishment and stabilization attempts (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996).  Stabilization causes intolerable levels of disturbance and eventually favors the establishment of perennials that typically outcompete amaranth.  Therefore, stabilization and beach replenishment will not occur on this beach.  Instead, amaranths natural tendency to ‘clump’ sand with its roots will be relied upon to stabilize dunes.  If absolutely necessary in the future, “beach replenishment and nourishment should be favored over sea walls and jetties;” replenishment and nourishment have had fewer negative effects than sea walls and jetties on Amaranth populations (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996).

Amaranth is extremely sensitive to competition and tends to dies out during succession as perennial species take root and monopolize water and critical limiting nutrients (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996).  Also, amaranth is generally severely handicapped by human disturbance; often pedestrians will step on Amaranth or drive over it where off-road vehicles are allowed.  To prevent this, during growing and flowering season all plants outside of the restricted area will be roped off with symbolic string.  Plants within the restricted area need not be roped off; people are already excluded from the area so they cannot negatively affect the plants.

Because Amaranth cannot successfully compete with other plants, particularly perennials that monopolize water supply and critical nutrients (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996), a restoration project favoring amaranth would ideally prevent establishment of these plants.  Amaranth has been somewhat tolerant of off road vehicle use of its habitat between December and May in Cape Hatteras, New Jersey.  This seems to be because the disturbance created by the vehicles does not occur during amaranths growing season and prevents establishment of perennials (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996).  This method of disturbance should be replicated on Rockaway Beach to prevent establishment of perennials.  From December until early March, to ensure that the disturbance does not impact the beach too near piping plover breeding season, the area will be unrestricted to pedestrians on the beach.  Because beach cleanups are one component of this project, they will occur during this time.  Additionally during this time period Urban Park Rangers should be allowed to and are encouraged to drive on the beach when conducting any necessary surveys and species counts.  This will inhibit growth of perennials that are detrimental to amaranths survival without threatening shorebirds (they do not frequently occur on the beach during these months) and without harming any amaranth seeds buried in the sand.

In addition to the above habitat modifications, the amaranth population at Rockaway Beach will be supplemented with seeds from other populations.  Amaranths reproductive and distribution strategies indicate similar genetics in each population (Falk et al., 2006), so introducing individuals poorly adapted for the Arverne Preserve is not of concern.  Just to be sure, isozyme analysis results from previous tests by The Maryland Natural Heritage Program to “look for genetic differences between… populations” should be obtained (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996).  If all populations are indeed genetically similar, it will not matter from what population seeds are obtained.  Because Amaranth reproduces through self-fertilization, inbreeding depression is not of concern.  Because inbreeding depression and adaptation to the habitat can be discounted, the only concern regarding harvesting and planting of supplemental seeds is preventing damage to the donor population.  In order to prevent damage and reduce risk of negatively impacting future donor populations, seeds should be taken from the largest population possible.  Seeds should be planted in the Arverne Preserve just before growing season each year.  If the seeds remain dormant, they should be left in the sand because they can remain dormant and stay viable for long periods of time.

Webworm herbivory is also a threat to Amaranth.  Five species of webworms (small moth caterpillars) have been known to infest sea beach amaranth.  Four species are common to populations in the Carolinas and one species has been found in New York.  The species in New York, Estigmene acraea, was observed in 1994.  All of these species are generalists and have increased in numbers due to the introduction and colonization of weedy plants in the area (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,1996).  If an infestation takes place, the entire Rockaway Beach amaranth population could be wiped out.  U.S. Fish and Wildlife has proposed two methods of dealing with these herbivores.  One method is to manually pick caterpillars off of Amaranth leaves.  This method cannot be used on Rockaway Beach during Piping plover nesting season, it would disturb plovers too much.  The other method is to use BT (Bacillus thuringensis) (1996), an insect specific bacteria that “has been developed as a microbial insecticide” (Weeden et al.).  BT “affects only lepidopterans (moths)” and is thought to be relatively harmless to other organisms (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1996).  In research conducted by several universities it was found to be non-toxic to plants, birds, most ‘beneficial’ insects, and aquatic organisms excluding mussels and shrimp.  It is thought to be non-toxic to mammals as well.  BT is naturally occurring, and breaks down after up to 48 hours in water and has a half-life of 3.8 hours under normal sunlight conditions (Extoxnet).  While BT does not affect many organisms adversely, it should not be used lightly.  Because it might be detrimental to mussels and shrimp that might inhabit the waters near the preserve, BT should not be used unless an infestation of webworms overtakes or threatens to seriously diminish the amaranth population.  In that case, it should be used only in low doses.

The reason for restricting use of BT in this area is to prevent damage benthic organisms it could potentially damage in the neighboring ocean habitat.  This is of great concern because, as is common in ocean-shore communities, resources from the community of “one habitat (the ocean) subsidize the community of” the other (the shore community) (Menninger and Palmer, 2006).  Piping plovers consume small invertebrates including marine worms, insects, crustaceans, and mollusks.  Because one component of their diet is marine organisms, it is important to the survival of plovers that the ocean habitat is maintained.  A well-functioning ocean habitat is similarly important to the least tern colony inhabiting Rockaway Beach; least terns subsist mainly on small fish (Migratory Bird Center, Smithsonian Zoological Park).

Other threats to prey species in the restoration area must be considered and prevented.  New York City’s sewage system and storm water runoff system share pipes, resulting in sewage runoff onto beaches in years of heavy rainfall.  “Loadings of nutrients and organic matter … from sewage treatment plants and runoff result in phytoplankton blooms and high suspended solid concentrations which, in turn, result in turbid water and low bottom dissolved oxygen concentrations” (Dowhan).  Oxygen depletion may result in fish mortality(Francis-Floyd) and can also “can kill clams, worms, and other small bottom organisms” (Tidal Habitat and Water Quality Monitoring).  This results in reduced prey for shorebirds like piping plovers and least terns.  Those fish that do survive to be consumed may be contaminated with bacteria that would in turn make birds consuming them ill. 

In 1998 sewage runoff into seawater occurred in such great amounts that beaches were closed.  The ‘Enhanced Beach Protection Program’ established in the same year resulted in more vigilant monitoring and more frequent maintenance actions for select sewage treatment facilities (Ryan).  This program seems to have been effective; a Harbor Water Quality Survey conducted in 1999 found that fecal coliform bacteria levels in the water had dropped to below100 cells per 100 mL.  Levels had previously reached as high as 300 cells per 100 mL.  Monitoring of sewage treatment facilities should continue and efforts to improve the sewage system will be made; the negative effects of another sewage runoff event could be devastating to the Rockaway Beach fish, invertebrate, and shorebird communities.  While improving the sewage system is out of the hands of the restoration practitioners, letters and petitions encouraging a change in the system can be prepared and submitted to the proper authorities. In addition, water quality tests should be conducted yearly to monitor levels of bacteria in the water.  Notes on the effects of higher levels of bacteria on the community, should high levels occur, will be kept for possible future research.

Improving prey resources is just one part of improving Rockaway Beach for Piping Plovers and other shorebirds.  Plovers will be focused upon here, but other birds that occupy this area and typically occur in the same habitats, such as Least Terns, will undoubtedly benefit from the measures proposed.

Piping Plovers are endangered migratory shorebirds that breed on Atlantic Beaches from Newfoundland to North Carolina between mid-March and August.  (Plover protection measures here will be in place between the beginning of March and the beginning of September, to be conservative.) Plover populations have become greatly diminished in the recent past, and efforts to save the bird have been initiated.  Currently, the Atlantic Coast breeding population is “332 pairs short of the recovery goal of 2000 pairs” (Cohen et al. 2006).  In 1993, the Rockaway Beach piping plover population consisted of 22 pairs (Dowhan).  This site is just one plover breeding ground in New York, and plover preservation efforts at this beach are already in place.  These efforts include the closing off of Arverne Shorebird Preserve and the ongoing plover monitoring conducted there.  Restoration plans in this proposal will complement the efforts already being made.

 

A study of a Westhampton Island (off of Long Island) breeding piping plover population conducted between 2000 and 2005 found mean site fidelity to be .83.  Other studies have found site fidelity among piping plovers to be .72 and .99 (Cohen et al., 2006).  These three figures indicate high breeding site fidelity among piping plovers.  Cohen et al. suggest that piping plovers “may disperse when habitat quality is poor or declining.”  This means that high site fidelity is exhibited when habitat conditions are acceptable and as such can be used as a measure of success for the restoration of Rockaway Beach. 

 

Increasing the suitability of the Rockaway Beach breeding site will also aid in promoting the Long Island piping plover metapopulation.  This population consists of several small local populations and can only persist if the breeding habitats of these populations remain suitable.  If any one of these habitats becomes unsuitable, other habitats must be available for its plovers to colonize.  “If dispersing plovers fail to find alternative breeding habitat, then population-level recovery will be hindered” and the Long Island metapopulation of breeding piping plovers will be at risk of extirpation (Cohen et al.).  Maintaining the Rockaway Beach breeding habitat will ensure at least one alternative breeding site for other plover populations to disperse to in case of site degradation elsewhere.

 

Immigration of plovers from other populations will increase genetic exchange among piping plovers.  In 1993, the breeding population at Rockaway Beach consisted of only 22 pairs.  Of these, only 15 pairs reproduced successfully (Dowhan).  Such a small effective population can indicate a high risk of inbreeding depression.  It has been suggested that few first year plovers return to hatching site to breed, but introduction of new individuals can still be beneficial.  Genetic diversity is vital to the persistence of any species in that it allows for adaptation to change and lowers the risk of inbreeding depression.  Increasing genetic exchange of any small population will ultimately increase genetic diversity in the metapopulation of that species, allowing for adaptation to change and thus increase in species survivability.

 

Several main problems must be addressed in improving Rockaway Beach as piping plover breeding habitat.  Among these are space availability and environmental requirements, human disturbance, and predators.

 

For nesting piping plovers require a beach at least thirty meters wide with a slope of less than eight percent (Fraser and Cohen).  Beaches must be sparsely vegetated, as plovers scrape their nests in bare sand.  Moist substrate habitat is essential- plovers need intertidal areas with possibility of shallow tide pools for foraging.  Wrack- washed up seaweed, terrestrial plants, and small dead shellfish- is also beneficial to foraging.  A great amount of foraging habitat will lead to a higher density of nesting plovers, faster growth, and better survival.  Rockaway Beach currently meets all of these habitat requirements, and the managed disturbance being implemented for sea beach amaranths benefit will also benefit piping plovers by ensuring that the beach does not become densely vegetated.

 

Human disturbance constitutes a threat to piping plovers.  Detrimental human disturbances range from beach stabilization to stepping on nests.  According to U.S. Fish and Wildlife, beach stabilization can have adverse effects on Piping Plovers.  Additionally, human “recreational disturbance may lower reproductive success” (Cohen et al., 2006).  Thirteen blocks of beach are closed to humans during piping plover nesting season, but the entire 13 blocks is not really usable to piping plovers.  “Plovers are easily disturbed” and mere nearness to people can stress them (Cape Lookout National Seashore).  This restoration plan calls for restriction of more than 13 blocks to people during nesting season.  19 blocks will be closed off, 3 on either side of the current preserve, creating a buffer zone between the area available to people and the area used for nesting.  Ideally, plovers will expand beyond the 13 blocks they have previously used for nesting and utilize the entire 19 blocks. 

 

Dogs are another threat introduced to plovers by humans.  Unleashed dogs may enter the nesting area and trample plover nests or frighten adult plovers, who will “abandon nests and chicks if they feel threatened” (Cape Lookout National Seashore), leaving them vulnerable to predators.  Therefore, Rockaway Beach will be closed to unleashed dogs during the breeding season.

 

Survivability of young is extremely important, and, according to metapopulation dynamics, even small changes in egg survival and hatching can result in “different estimates of extinction risk.”(Falk et al., 2006)  If young plovers do not survive to leave the breeding ground, the population decline will continue to extinction.  Survival of Rockaway Beach hatchlings also affects the Atlantic Coast metapopulation of plovers.  If many of the young from one population are lost, those hatchlings will not be available to disperse to other breeding grounds and supplement the gene pools of those populations in the future.  One of the main threats to hatchling and fledglings as well as mature plovers is predation.

The predator problem is exacerbated by people.  Garbage left on the beach provides food for predators and has allowed their populations to grow, increasing predatory risk to piping plovers and other shorebirds.  Better trash management would combat this and would hopefully lower the population sizes of feral cat, gulls, and raccoons.  Relatively simple solutions that will be implemented are fining for littering, posting signs discouraging against littering, providing more garbage receptacles on the beach, holding volunteer beach cleanups, and requiring all garbage receptacles in the Rockaway Beach area to be covered with lids.

 

Other methods must be used to control predation on plover hatchlings.  Predator exclosures can prevent the main predators of plovers- gulls, raccoons, feral cats, and foxes- from preying so successfully on plovers.  Predator exclosures are built around nests to keep eggs and young from being consumed by predators.  These exclosures are generally effective until hatchlings are able to leave the nest.  At that point, they become highly vulnerable to predators.  Some studies have implemented mammal trapping programs to reduce predator populations (Lauro and Tanacredi, 2002).  These programs have been effective and will be considered for this site in the future.

While implementing these new plans in the Rockaway Beach Arverne Shorebird Preserve, monitoring of plovers from a distance, three days a week should be occur and records of the number of plovers present, number of nesting pairs, and number of eggs per clutch should be kept.  To track genetic variability, if at all possible, distinguishing marks should be noted on birds nesting at the restoration site.  Birds present should be observed (from a distance) and taken note of each breeding season, as well as their success in breeding, and if their hatchlings survive to leave the nesting ground.  

 

After the preliminary measures of the plan, previously stated, have been put into effect, an after school program for interested children should begin.  This program will be designed to educate children about Piping Plovers and Sea Beach Amaranth and will teach them the value of preserving nature.  Children will accompany Urban Park Rangers on Plover Observations, will aid in putting symbolic fences around sea beach amaranth, and will help with beach cleanups.

Restoration of Rockaway Beach will, of course, contribute to the protection and survival of the focal endangered species: Piping Plovers, Sea Beach Amaranth, and Least Terns.  There are also benefits to humans.  The after school program will benefit children by educating them about environmental issues and endangered species conservation.  Beach cleanups will result in a cleaner beach for people to enjoy.  Additionally, some species of Amaranth are being experimented with as a food crop.  If this species of Amaranth increases enough it too may be experimented with for food (New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection).  This plan is beneficial to people and the Rockaway Beach habitat in many ways, and is greatly encouraged for the benefit of all.

 

Timeline

 

Restoration of this area will not be considered complete until:

 

1.  Sea Beach Amaranth occupies the area for 10 consecutive years; this time period is the criteria for recovery in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s ‘Recovery Plan for Sea Beach Amaranth.’ 

2.  The Atlantic Coast Piping Plover Population has reached 2000 mating pairs, the recovery goal listed by Cohen, Fraser, and Catlin in ‘Survival and site fidelity of Piping Plovers on Long Island, New York’.

 

 

Restoration of Rockaway Beach will likely require more than 10 years of dedicated work, depending on how quickly Piping Plover and Sea Beach Amaranth populations increase.

The following estimated man-hours and budget represent amounts of time and money not already being spent by NYC Urban Park Ranger efforts at Arverne Shorebird Preserve.

 

Year 1

 

Immediately

1.  Write to The Maryland Natural Heritage Program to obtain Sea Beach Amaranth genetic isozyme analysis test results. (2 hours to compose and send letter)

 

2.  Write a letter to the NYC Department of Environmental Protection and to NYC Waste Management to encourage pursuit of a better sewage system.  (5 hours to compose and send letter)

 

3.  Begin bi-monthly volunteer beach cleanups.  Cleanups will occur in seasonally restricted areas from December to March, and in unrestricted areas year round.

 

4.  Set new garbage cans with caps in convenient areas on the beach, post ‘No Littering’ signs.  (12 hrs)

 

About 19 additional hours

 

Spring

5.  Identify the nearest and largest population of Amaranth, obtain permission to collect seeds, collect and store seeds during growing season, plant the following year (in February).  One park ranger will scout areas bi-weekly and collect seeds once any necessary permission has been obtained.  (10 hours per month for 3 months)

 

6. Post signs about and enforce a Dog Leash Rule from March to September

(2 hours posting signs)

 

7. Increase Arverne current restricted 13 blocks to 19 blocks March-Sept

 

8. Construct symbolic fences around Sea Beach Amaranth individuals (30 hours)

About 62 additional hours

 

Winter

9. Begin allowing Park Rangers to drive on the beach between December and beginning of March

 

10. Obtain water quality test results from the New York City Department of Environmental Protection when they become available  (4 hours to obtain and read results)

 

About 4 additional hours

 

Total Additional hours Year 1: 85 hours + 15 unexpected hours = 100 NYC Urban Park Ranger hours additional to already ongoing work at Arverne.

 

Each additional year

 

11. Continue items 1-10

 

Year 5

 

12. Begin after school program; program will meet 1 day per week every week except for holidays. (5 hrs per week preparing, running, and cleaning up after program) 240 hours + 96 unexpected hours = 336 additional hours

 

Hours for 1^st 5 years:

Yearly 100 hours for 5 years = 500 hours + 336 hours for after school program =

886 hours beyond what is already being done at the Arverne Shorebird Preserve.

 

Budget

 

Year 1:

Item 3 on timeline: $100 for garbage bags

Item 4 on timeline: $1500 for 10 new garbage cans, $220 for 10 ‘No Littering’ signs

Item 6 on timeline: $220 for 10 ‘Dogs Must Be On Leash’ signs

Item 8 on timeline: $310 for 100 stakes and 2400 feet rope for symbolic fences

 

Total Budget, year 1:  $2,350

 

 

Years 2-4:

Item 3 on timeline: $100 for garbage bags (yearly)    total: $300

Item 8 on timeline: $310 for stakes and rope for symbolic fences (yearly)     total: $930

Item 4 on timeline: $750 for 5 additional/replacement garbage cans (years 2 and 4)

 total:$1500

 

Total Budget, years 2-4: 2,730

 

Year 5:

Item 3 on timeline: $100 for garbage bags

Item 8 on timeline: $310 for stakes and rope for symbolic fences

Item 12 on timeline: $24,000 for one new employee to run after school program

 

Total Budget, year 5: 24,410

 

 

Other Possible Costs:

Possibilities: new predator exclosures, need for BT and more

Total:  $10,000

TOTAL BUDGET YEARS 1-5:  $39,490

 

 

Sources

" Bacillus thuringiensis." Pesticide Information Profiles. June 1996. E X T O X N E T. 8 Nov. 2006 < http://extoxnet.orst.edu/pips/bacillus.htm>.

Cohen, Jonathan. 2005. Factors Limiting Piping Plover Nesting Pair Density and Reproductive Output on Long Island, New York. Virginia Polytechnic Institue.

Cohen, Fraser, and Catlin. "Survival and site fidelity of Piping Plovers on Long Island, New York." J. Field Ornith. 77(4) (2006): 409-417.

D’Antonio and Chambers. “Using Ecological Theory to Manage or Restore Ecosystems Affected by Invasive Plant Species.” Foundations of Restoration Ecology. Editors: Falk, Donald A., Palmer, Margaret A., Zedler, Joy B.  Washington: Island Press, 2006

Dowhan, Joseph. " Significant Habitats and Habitat Complexes of the New York Bight Watershed." Southern New England - New York Bight Coastal Ecosystems Program. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. <http://training.fws.gov/library/pubs5/weblink /text/toc.htm#16.>.

Ehleringer and Sandquist. “Ecophysiological Constraints on Plant Responses in a Restoration Setting.” Foundations of Restoration Ecology. Editors: Falk, Donald A., Palmer, Margaret A., Zedler, Joy B.  Washington: Island Press, 2006

Falk, Richards, Montalvo, Knapp. “Population and Ecological Genetics in Restoration Ecology.” Foundations of Restoration Ecology. Editors: Falk, Donald A., Palmer, Margaret A., Zedler, Joy B.  Washington: Island Press, 2006

Francis-Floyd, Ruth. "Dissolved Oxygen for Fish Production." Sept 1992. University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. 1 Dec. 2006 < http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/FA002>.

Fraser and Cohen. " Piping Plover habitat considerations for beach nourishment project designs." Powerpoint Presentation. < http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/workshops/05oct-dots/s5-Fraser-Cohen.pdf>

 

Hoffmann, M.P. and Frodsham, A.C. (1993) Natural Enemies of Vegetable Insect Pests. Cooperative Extension, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. 63 pp.

 

Lauro B., J. Tanacredi. 2002. An examination of predatory pressures on Piping Plovers nesting at Breezy Point, New York. Col. Waterbirds. 25:401–409.

"Least Tern." Life History. Migratory Bird Center, Smithsonian National Zoological Park. 8 Nov. 2006 < http://nationalzoo.si.edu/ConservationAndScience/MigratoryBirds/Life_History/default.cfm?id=39>.

Maschinski. “Implications of Population Dynamics and Metapopulation Theory for Restoration.” Foundations of Restoration Ecology. Editors: Falk, Donald A., Palmer, Margaret A., Zedler, Joy B.  Washington: Island Press, 2006

Menninger and Palmer. “Restoring Ecological Communities: From Theory to Practice.” Foundations of Restoration Ecology. Editors: Falk, Donald A., Palmer, Margaret A., Zedler, Joy B.  Washington: Island Press, 2006

Naeem. “Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning in Restored Ecosystems: Extracting Principles for a Synthetic Perspective.” Foundations of Restoration Ecology. Editors: Falk, Donald A., Palmer, Margaret A., Zedler, Joy B.  Washington: Island Press, 2006

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection; Division of Parks and Forestry. Endangered Plants of New Jersey Fact Sheet: Sea-beach Amaranth Amaranthus pumilus Rafinesque. Trenton, New Jersey.

 

Noss, Reed and Cooperrider, Allen. Protecting and Restoring Biodiversity . Washington DC and Covelo CA: Island Press, 1994.

Piping Plovers." Cape Lookout National Seashore.  2001. < http://www.nps.gov/archive/calo/plov.htm>.

“Rockaway Beach Arverne Shorebird Preserve." New York City Department of Parks and Recreation. Forever Wild. .

"Rockaway...place of waters bright waters."  History. The Wave. 8 November 2006. <http://www.rockawave.com/common/history/history.html >.

Ryan, Geoff. " New York City's Enhanced Beach Program."Department of Environmental Protection.  2000. < http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/dep/html/press/00-17pr.html>.

" Tidal Water and Habitat Quality Monitoring." Chesapeake Bay. 1995-2006. Maryland Department of Natural Resources. <http://www.dnr.state.md.us/Bay/monitoring/water/ >.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. " 2002-2003 Status Update:
U.S. Atlantic Coast Piping Plover Population." Annual Status Report. 2003. < http://www.fws.gov/northeast/pipingplover/status/index.html >.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. " Critical Habitat for Piping Plover." 2001. < http://www.fws.gov/plover/>.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Recovery Plan for Seabeach Amaranth (Amaranthus pumilius) Rafinesque. Atlanta, Georgia

Weeden, Shelton, Hoffman. "Bacteria." Biological Control: A Guide to Natural Enemies in North America. 1976. Cornell University. 8 Nov. 2006 <http://www. http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/ent/biocontrol/pathogens/bacteria.html >.